The Will of the People: Readings in American Democracy
Judicial Branch
As is the case with the executive and legislative branches of government, the federal judiciary has evolved in function and structure over the last 200 years. It has been shaped by changing social conditions, shifting political circumstances, and, not least of all, by the individuals who have held office as judges. Even so, the carefully guarded independence of the Supreme Court and the system of federal courts mandated by Article III, grounded in the principle of lifetime tenure of judges, has provided great stability over relatively long periods. The common designation of the highest court by the name of the serving Chief Justice – so that we speak of the "Warren Court" or the "Rehnquist court" – recognizes that each Court gives a discernible direction and emphasis to the decisions it cumulatively hands down.
When Alexander Hamilton wrote Federalist Paper No. 78, arguing for the system of courts provided for in Article III, he saw the judiciary as the weakest branch because it had neither will nor power, only judgment. Yet because of its function to determine whether laws are consistent with the Constitution, and its ability to make determinations on the decisions of many rankings of lower courts, the federal judiciary has assumed far more influence than Hamilton may have anticipated. With the authority to determine which laws stand and which do not, the federal judiciary often comes under fire for usurping some of the functions of the legislature.
The following articles from The Christian Science Monitor archive present a range of issues closely related to the provisions of Article III, including the power of Congress to establish courts, the conditions for the tenure of judges, and the principle of trial by jury.
Article III, Section 1
-
Expanding Federal Courts Curtis J. Sitomer
-
Article III gives Congress the power to “ordain and establish” inferior courts. In recent years, the immense volume of cases heard by these courts has severely strained their capacity. This article discusses the request by the U.S. Chief Justice that Congress increase the size of the federal court system.
-
What Would the Founding Fathers Say? N. Lee Cooper
-
Federal judges hold their offices for life or, as stated in Article III, “during good behavior.” This article looks at the conditions that permit judges to be impeached and removed from office.
-
A Reliably Assertive Supreme Court David J. Garrow - Because Supreme Court justices serve for many years, the kinds of decisions the Court hands down form a discernable pattern over time. This article looks at the current Court under U.S. Chief Justice Rehnquist and discusses the overarching themes of its work.
Article III, Section 2
-
Safeguard the Courts
-
The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is established by Article III, mainly as the highest court of appeal. However, this is qualified by the phrase, “with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.” From time to time, bills are introduced in Congress that propose limiting the kinds of cases the Supreme Court can hear. This article looks at whether such bills are constitutionally allowable.
-
The Power of Judicial Review Charlotte Saikowski
-
The Founding Fathers did not envision that the Supreme Court would develop into such a powerful agent for making domestic policy. The article gives a capsule history of how this has occurred over the past 200 years, primarily through the practice of judicial review–that is, making decisions on the constitutionality of laws through the appeal of cases from lower courts.
-
Destiny With Appointments Editorial
-
The three divisions of U.S. government–executive, legislative, and judiciary–are said to act as checks and balances on one another. In recent years, the decisions of the Supreme Court–including the overturn of 24 acts of Congress–have made the Court more of a check than a balance. This article raises questions about whether this is happening because legislatures and lower courts are passing the buck on issues that the framers of the Constitution expected them to decide.
-
Shipping Case Shifts More Power to States Warren Richey
-
Among the issues that the Supreme Court deals with are disputes involving the authority of states as opposed to the authority of the national government. The case discussed in this article was decided in favor of South Carolina's authority. It continues a series of rulings over the last few years that uphold greater local, versus federal, control.
-
The U.S. Jury System: Of, By, and For the People James Andrews -
Article III establishes the practice of trial by jury. Today many Americans question whether juries, in general, ensure that laws are fairly applied. This article discusses how the courts can better prepare jury members for their responsibilities.
-
Big Trials Change Juror Lives Jillian Lloyd - In many high-profile cases, jurors receive harsh criticism from the public and the media and undergo great emotional stress. Even so, in post-trial interviews, many jurors say that the decision on the jury was one of the most significant of their lives.
Article III, Section 3
-
FBI Agent Taken to Task in Report on Double-Agent Abraham Mclaughlin
- “Plea Bargain May Help FBI Recover from Spy Incident”
-
Article III defines the crime of treason against the United States as “levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” The recent case discussed in these articles is an example of betrayal not for political reasons or adherence to an enemy's cause, but for financial gain.
-
John Walker, Hapless Seeker? Editorial
- Although American John Walker's collusion with Islamic militants in Afghanistan would ordinarily be prosecuted as treason, the U.S. Justice Department decided not to charge him with this crime, for reasons related to the war on terrorism.